Personalised training programmes? i don't remember receiving one of those, maybe because I don't have a vagina? Wait, did she meet the 50kg limit? or does she not need to meet that either? Ah yes, Equality but on their terms. 50% more likely to get injured but given 50% more effort and help with 100% vagina.

Its all a load of political sh!te, look at the lad that comments about doing AACC in the 1970s, and saying 2 females got cuddled through it and given extra rests and extra time or attempts.

But on a serious note, I'm quite surprised that only one attempted, not as surprised no one got in first time. I fully expect one to get in sooner or later but if they've had such a low interest rate, how worth while has the scheme been?

CTC asked 3 females within the RN to take part in a 4 month comprehensive fitness programme. The purpose being to prepare women to pass PRMC. Only one agreed and she was a Band Cpl. She eventually took part in a PRMC and she states that she "did well". She also undertook elements of the POC.

The article gives the impression that the thinking was to see if women are capable of passing PRMC, nothing more, as she is now back in the Band and wishes all aspiring women good luck.

Interesting choice of photos in the mail. First one is Royal Marines Band recruits undergoing phase one training at CTC. Second is an American aircraft weapons loading team with a USMC AV8B (Harrier variant).

Difficult to know what to make of 'did well' (could it possibly be deliberate?). Does that mean was good but failed?
Did well but not excellently (pass)?
Did excellently?
Always with the ambiguity.

Click to expand...

Agreed, but leaving aside the debate about 'standards' the individual should be applauded for taking on a challenge which she was not obliged to.
As a professional musician—with other military duties—in the Royal Marines it is no surprise that she should want to return to her chosen career path.

I was aware female RMBS personnel had undertaken stand alone elements of PRMC and females who had previously undertaken AACC were consulted, but hadn't heard of any female undertaking a full PRMC either as a trial or as an applicant yet. The 'did well' bit, I think (happy to be corrected) means achieved in individual PRMC elements but not taken in entirety.

The more astute will have notice that PRMC itself is evolving and the last three courses of last year appear to have achieved significantly higher than average pass rates.

Go back far enough and there wasn't a PRC/PRMC or indeed any pass/fail physical fitness criteria assessments such as the PJFT (introduced in 2003) to get into Royal Marines recruit training but the RT fail rate was much, much higher than it is today.

Go back far enough and there wasn't a PRC/PRMC or indeed any pass/fail physical fitness criteria assessments such as the PJFT (introduced in 2003) to get into Royal Marines recruit training but the RT fail rate was much, much higher than it is today.

Click to expand...

Agreed! There was only 11 left in the Squad/Troop that I passed out with, of which around 9 were originals. I was not one of them. My guess is that figure would have been lower, but you were only allowed one option to get out of training after attestation and that was after 3 months when you could buy out for £20. After that you were locked in with the hardest elements of RT to come.

All this chat of standards makes me think of only one set of remarks in the last 12 months and that was the visit by the Canadian and Australian transition teams to CTCRM. They have made changes to their countries training programs to allow a female pass rate in their military for what is really a political end. Breaking up required testing into units and allowing multiple repeats will allow ranks to achieve passes in the same mandatory tests. Which will eventually end with female ranks achieving required standard. All be it after lots of fails, rest and repeat. There is alot written on this encourage your own research but i'm 99.999999% certain this is eventually the route which will be taken.

The the fitness tests and standards will be taken back to the drawing board....

I agree with @Rossi on this, it is a set back but the regressive left political windbags and their spineless caviar munching officers will no doubt break it down and get round it.

That report already said it would be up for review and subject to change.

Problem is, if they manage to change it, it will never be able to be reversed. Ever. Especially not in this day and age. The military is rightly the last industry for the HSE and political brigade to get its claws into but the fist is closing tightly round it.

We all ready see evidence of it being a bad idea with other public sectors and with the Army that already has seperate (unequal) testing of male and female (yet happy to receive equal pay...).

It certainly seems at the minute, that The Royal Navy is commited to no lowering of standards? Which is excellent news!! I just hope that political interference doesn't change the position of the RN!!

Click to expand...

Not 100% sure Arny. Speaking to the lads who passed PRMC in the galley last month and they said how surprised they were when they got there that the BFT is now 11:30 maximum and the bleep test is 10.5 minimum.

Not 100% sure Arny. Speaking to the lads who passed PRMC in the galley last month and they said how surprised they were when they got there that the BFT is now 11:30 maximum and the bleep test is 10.5 minimum.

Click to expand...

Oh really??? That's a shame. To be fair, if someone needs 11:30 to run a BFT, they need to have a word with themselves.

When will women be able to apply? And when will they be able to join from?

Click to expand...

They could officially apply last October. Can't remember off the top of my head but I don't think we're expecting any to enter into recruit training before Sept 17 to Jan 18, assuming they successfully pass selection. I know of about two or three female potential Officer candidates, but think the earliest target is Sept 2018 YO batch.

Oh really??? That's a shame. To be fair, if someone needs 11:30 to run a BFT, they need to have a word with themselves.

Click to expand...

Agreed. I was running within that pace over a marathon course in my 50s.

As for having a word with themselves, I can recall an RSM in 40 Commando in recent years who took the whole Unit for their CFT on his 50th birthday and rumour was that if anyone had a slower time than him, he would be having "words" with them!

I can recall an RSM in 40 Commando in recent years who took the whole Unit for their CFT on his 50th birthday and rumour was that if anyone had a slower time than him, he would be having "words" with them!

Click to expand...

Id rather die than get on the wrong side of my old RSM. "Mad Cow" we called him!! Dear God!! Scared the living daylights out of many!!